Bus Rapid Transit 101: Everything you need and want to know about BRT in London

Ahead of a public input meeting about bus rapid transit on Wednesday, May 3, The Free Press has put together a BRT primer, with everything you need to know about the proposal, its supporters and its critics.

WHAT IS BRT?

Bus rapid transit is a system of high-frequency public transit buses designed to carry more people more quickly across London. It’s focused on moving riders in and out of downtown, largely, but it would extend north (to Masonville Place mall), east (to Fanshawe College), west (to Oxford/Wonderland roads) and south (to White Oaks Mall).

WHAT’S THE COST?

The price to set it up is $560 million, with city hall’s stake capped at $130 million, and the rest needed from senior governments at Queen’s Park and Ottawa.

CONSTRUCTION TIMELINE

It would extend to 2027, so this is the definition of long-term planning.

WHAT’S RAPID ABOUT IT?

It’s not about speed — rather, it’s based on frequency — at peak times, a bus would come by every five minutes — and right-of-way through traffic.

WHAT’S THE PROBLEM?

Where do we start?

The price has upset people.

The exact routes have angered several business and homeowners.

Some who wanted city council to build light rail, rather than a bus-only system, are still raw that they opted against it.

Downtown merchants have organized under the banner Down Shift, pushing for major route changes that would take BRT out of a huge part of the core.

There’s a common denominator, says Toronto-based public policy adviser Brian Kelcey: “There’s a pushback to find any excuse to say no to these projects,” he said. “(It) is such an expensive project, it makes it a lot easier for residents to panic and say no because if all their arguments don’t work, they can say ‘we’re being fiscally conservative and cautious with public money, so let’s not do it at all.’”

THE BATTLEGROUND (PART 1)

Council is overwhelmingly in favour of BRT. The issue is the routes, the biggest one the north corridor: On Clarence Street, into a 900-metre tunnel that opens at the northwest corner of Victoria Park, running beneath Richmond Row, and opening on Richmond Street near St. Joseph’s hospital; BRT would then run on dedicated lanes before juking west into Western University’s campus. Critics want the route moved west, to Wharncliffe/Western roads, but city hall statistics suggest that has far less potential, with only 3,695 “people and jobs” along it, compared to 21,918 along the Richmond path. Another problem? The road widening on Wharncliffe wouldn’t be enough to accommodate BRT-dedicated lanes without choking traffic, especially north of Oxford Street, staff say.

THE BATTLEGROUND (PART 2)

The other route flashpoint is King Street, near Budweiser Gardens and Covent Garden Market. City staff propose reducing it to a single lane of vehicle traffic, with curb-running lanes dedicated to buses running east and west. Merchants and venues like The Bud have called for changes, and one option is to move one of the BRT lanes onto Queens Avenue. That so-called couplet seems like a reasonable compromise that may be irresistible to politicians seeking to quell public backlash against the project. “We’ve got to do the couplet,” Coun. Tanya Park, who represents downtown, said this week. Mayor Matt Brown and city councillors are scheduled to make a decision on all the routes May 15.

THE TUNNEL

It’s at the heart of both the BRT system and the backlash against it. It would run 900 metres, essentially from the Victoria Park bandshell to Richmond Street in Old North, with its floor about eight metres below Richmond Row.

Staff have estimated its cost at $90 million, but an updated business case leaves all kinds of questions: “Until more detailed designs and studies are undertaken, the costs of the tunnel remain uncertain,” the document reads.

Critics fear cost overruns could gobble up much of the $169-million contingency fund built into the BRT budget.

It was designed to avoid the level train crossing on Richmond Street near Pall Mall Street. It’s so lengthy to accommodate a switch to light rail — a remote possibility, to say the least — in the future.

One option? An underpass at the level train crossing at Richmond Row. But a new analysis by city consultants estimates it would only be about 20 per cent cheaper than the tunnel, carry many of the same dig-related risks and require one half of the buildings on a two-block stretch of Richmond Row to be razed.

Council could also put dedicated BRT lanes right on Richmond Street, not beneath it, and live with the level rail crossing. But how would a BRT system work if trains were stopping it at various points in the day?

THAT’S A LOT OF MONEY

Is it ever — $560 million would make BRT the single biggest infrastructure project in London’s history.

As noted, $430 million of that is requested from the Ontario and federal governments, both of which have shown a willingness to fund such projects but haven’t forked over much cash yet. At this point, only $8 million from Ottawa has been committed to London’s BRT plan.

City officials also frame the construction costs another way: While London will spend $130 million, they project it will increase transit ridership, take cars off the street and save city hall $290 million in road expansion costs over 20 years.

Waterloo Region’s light rail system, which is nearly done, cost the municipality $250 million but will save twice that amount on “roads we won’t have to build,” Waterloo politician Tom Galloway has said. Those figures are only for construction, not operation.

COOL BUSES?

London Transit officials admit the BRT system isn’t meant to lure car-loving Londoners out of their vehicles today — it’s meant to give future generations a reasonable transportation alternative through the city. OK, but it’s hard to imagine city buses being cool. BRT buses, however, can look quite sleek, and London is mulling a fleet of electric buses for the system. The interior of BRT buses in other cities is configured differently and often include amenities such as WiFi, USB charging stations and modified seating. Bus design hasn’t started here yet.

WHAT IT’S REALLY ABOUT

Local critics of BRT say they want greater investment in transit, but just have problems with the plan. BRT, however, isn’t just about transit — it’s really about drawing compact development along the routes and curbing sprawl. That’s a key tenet of the London Plan, the city’s vision for its future, which, as Mayor Matt Brown often says, can’t exist without rapid transit. As The Free Press has reported, Waterloo’s light rail plan is all about attracting development along the lines. “It moves people, that’s what it physically does,” Galloway said in March. “But it’s really more of a planning tool. It intensifies (development).” Don’t expect BRT to have the same success as light rail in that sense, however — developers love the permanency of rail lines, and bus routes simply don’t offer that.

AN EXPERT’S VIEW

Martin Horak, head of Western University’s local government program, has studied various rapid transit projects and watched the London debate closely. He agrees it’s become an emotional issue on both sides of the debate, and that’s not surprising. “A big infrastructure project like this becomes symbolic for many (residents) of the way the city operates and the kind of city they live in,” he said. “For many, it is an emotional issue because it’s about the kind of city they live in, the kind of lifestyle they have. Because there hasn’t been great communication from (city hall) to the public . . . that opens the door to a lot of speculation of, what is this really about? Is this a white elephant?” Horak adds: “It has become a bit of a flashpoint for a lot of suspicions and discontent that people might have on other matters.”

A CRITIC’S VIEW

Dan McDonald worked for Tom Gosnell when he was mayor. He’s the spokesperson for Down Shift, and he’s clear on BRT’s biggest problem — the cost. “One of the biggest hurdles is the potential impact on taxpayers right across the board,” he said. “Unknown construction costs, unknown ridership . . . expropriation (of land) still hasn’t been sorted out. I don’t care if it’s federal or provincial (money paying for it), there’s only one taxpayer.” McDonald said he’s heard from homeowners in the suburbs, away from the proposed corridors. “We’re getting a lot of calls from people saying, ‘I don’t think I’m going to get a lot of benefits but I think I’m going to get hit financially.’”

A BOOSTER’S VIEW

Tech entrepreneur Shawn Adamsson spearheads Shift Happens, a group pushing council to approve BRT as it’s proposed. ”We’re not living in a sustainable way right now. We can’t continue to widen roads or add lanes. That’s city planning 101, widening roads doesn’t reduce congestion,” he said. London, he says, can’t be left behind on transit. “We need to take the best lessons we can from (successful other) cities. It’s pretty clear rapid transit is what those cities are doing to reduce congestion over time. We’re designing a city for our children and grandchildren so they have mobility choices.”

London-based Libro Credit Union has offered qualified support of BRT “in general,” but stayed out of the route debate.

Western has given conditional support to the proposed route going through its campus. Officials with Fanshawe College, where the east leg of the system would end, haven’t yet made a formal declaration.

London Chamber of Commerce chief executive Gerry Macartney has been tepid in his comments, saying only that council must “slow down” and “get this right.” Contrast that with Hamilton Chamber of Commerce boss Keanin Loomis, who has fought for light rail approval there, calling it a “no-brainer.”

HOW LONDON STACKS UP:

London is Canada’s largest city without any form of rapid transit, only conventional public transit bus service.

STUDY THIS:

Among major student cities in Canada — with 50,000 post-secondary students, we’re definitely one — London also stands out by its lack of rapid transit. Students in Canada’s largest cities have subways to get around, while many in the rest of big-city Canada have light-rail or bus rapid transit.

DOES SIZE MATTER?

Some say London is too small for rapid transit.

Nonsense, others say, pointing to Waterloo Region and elsewhere.

With a population of about 390,000, closer to half a million if outlying areas are counted, London is only somewhat smaller than Edmonton and Calgary were when they began light-rail rapid transit systems decades ago.

It’s larger than Ottawa was when it began its bus rapid transit highway system in the 1980s.

THE POLITICAL BACKDROP

BRT wasn’t a bid deal when Londoners elected an almost entirely new city council three years ago, But as the next election nears in 18 months, it’s rapidly consuming much of the city’s political oxygen — and could do so for years yet. Some analysts say rapid transit is the Groundhog Day of civic issues: Even in cities committed to the concept, it has a way of coming up again and again as systems evolve and expand.

THE BOTTOM LINE

In the end, it’s about the votes on council. City politicians are to vote on the routes May 15 and 16, and people on both sides will tell you they believe there’s enough political support to approve the north corridor, perhaps with the tunnel. That’s far from guaranteed, though. Coun. Josh Morgan is declaring a conflict, which means only seven votes are needed to stop it. But they may not be there. Down Shift, the group pushing for major changes, admitted that concern in an April 5 tweet. “Wake up London,” they wrote on Twitter. “Council will vote (for) Richmond tunnel, no matter what, no matter the cost.” There are no real voting blocs on council, so it’s difficult to get a read on where the majority’s leaning.

This Week's Flyers

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.